Well that's a bit of a personal question.

I love how absolutely no one seems to care. I may be tired, but, is that an obvious rhetorical joke, or is there something here ?

Because you can also start calculating the chances of how many times that 1/4 chance hits or do not hit :)

You can calculate the chance for getting drawn as scum (the 1/4 chance) in 1 draw, 2 draws, 3 draws and so on. It should be a binominal distribution calculation (Bernoulli / fail or success calculation)

Why would you say that? Even if you're telling the truth, you're not making things any clearer about Telika, nmillar or yourself. If you're town you're just making yourself a target.


And now pazzer claims as well...

But how does that have any bearing on what RB was saying? Previous games don't have an effect on the likelihood of anyone being mafia in this game. :P

I am not the one to beat around the bush. :-p


Gah, I read start of that sentence then skipped to end, even wondered if I should ask what day cop is he talking about and if I should correct him about CSPVG but then I decided to leave it.

But pazzer has history of claiming day ability before so I would wait with accepting his claim.

Personally I just do not believe it at the moment... I also find the wording "no town result" interesting.

Well, I'd appreciate a little dialogue between Pazzer and Flub, here.

I meant fake day abilities in my previous post.

Mmm, it could be interpreted as a lack of a result rather than "he is not town". Maybe Pazzer was day blocked? :B

"a no town"

Well yes I know NOW whether or not they were all telling the truth but please let me get to that in my own time!

Telika had been voted for by Telika, nmillar.
JMich had been voted for by nobody.
Flubbucket had been voted for by pazzer .
pazzer had been voted for by nobody.
Robbeasy had been voted for by nobody.
Vitek had been voted for by P1na.
p1na had been voted for by nobody.
amok had been voted for by DarkoD13, red_baron.
DarkoD13 had been voted for by nobody.
CSPVG had been voted for by nobody.
Twilightbard had been voted for by nobody.
SirPrimalform had been voted for by nobody
nmillar had been voted for by Robbeasy, SirPrimalform
Red_Baron had been voted for by amokand Vitek.
and, yes!
There is no-one else.

meaning that Telika, amok, nmillar and red_baron were just just SIX votes away from a majority vote!!! I could hardly breathe!
While that was going on Twilightbard, and CSPVG, and JMich flubbucket were conspicuous in that they had voted for nobody at all!

And I remember being in bed by 7th Feb o'clock.

I don't believe I was that close to a lynch, but heck if I had been lynched I would have kept our proud and sad tradition alive.

Oh and yes, of course I am. We constantly bigger because I keep forgetting that he is my underling and argues with him, while he doesn't know who I am, but based on the portraits on the walls he is guessing that I am either the mayer he was about to kill or his don. :P

Great, another claim.... If all of these are true claims we really gotta think carefully about this lynch......, so lynch amok :P

As long as the meta isn't the reason you are voting, then feel free to judge on whatever you believe you can. I took a look back and I do recall something about sisters with Robbeasy and me hammering to win, but that is about it. And if I recall in that game I was way way absentminded given that my focus was on something entirely else - my master project. So again, you are welcome to try to meta, but you can't predict anything from it. Not because I want to discredit it, but because I am a very very random person and as such I would consider it unlikely you can compare one reaction of mine in one game to a reaction in another - even if we had had those who shall not be named in the first game, the fact that it was a game where I barely read before responding doesn't really help.
But yes, as long as that is not the sole reason I see no reason to discuss this would you, I would just hate to see it used as the argument, because it would be impossible to explain, refute and be completely wrong as to whom I am ;)

Quoted for truth :)

I wasn't quoting him.

I mean, can this be interpreted as no result ? Doesn't the "a" prevent this interpretation?